Research Associate 87-90 Newcastle 92-95 Director of CEM 03-10 Retirement from CEM Peter Tymms (1987-2016) Research Associate 87-90 Newcastle 92-95 Director of CEM 03-10

Who is here? Educationalists Friends and relations Including CEM – now and earlier School of Education – now and earlier Newcastle University – now and earlier Educational Organisations PhD students past and present Friends and relations Including Physicists Statisticians Phychologists Medics and health related folk A Vet A Tax man A stand up comic

Outline Excerpts from my time in CEM Development Using the data systematically Interventions Challenging policy and practice Opportunistic research What now?

A Scatterplot

Background to CEM To improve education by using the methods of science This implies a need for Ongoing monitoring Interventions The Monitoring Model: ALIS Confidential Measurement-based Self-evaluation

CEM Growth Kate Bailey Christine Merrell Paul Jones Rod Bramald Pat Preedy Stephen Albone Mark Wightman

2/1 0/32 Non-UK Schools Participating in CEM Centre Projects 2007/08 Netherlands 6/3 0/32 1/0 2/1 Belgium 3/0 12/2 6/0 2/0 0/1 0/1 4/2 4/0 14/2 2/1 1/1 Qatar 6/2 6/2 5/1 UAE 11/3 3/2 3/1 Cyprus 5/0 Oman 3/0 0/1 Bermuda 1/0 11/4 1/2 Hong Kong 5/30 0/1 0/1 Bahrain 3/1 6/2 Brunei 0/1 Cayman Is. 2/0 1/0 3/1 Singapore 5/4 1/12 21/22 0/775 193/72 Falklands 2/0 Right of slash: contracts with primary schools Mauve box: standard CEM Centre projects run in non-UK schools Yellow box: local versions of CEM Centre projects Left of slash: contracts with secondary schools 2/1 0/32

Gaynor Richardson Michelle Dixon Sarah Craggs Development System creation PIPS INCAS Identifying reading problems P scales iPIPS Test development BLA 93 Year 1 to 8 Advice (Designing monitoring systems) VANP 96-97 Technical and Ethical Issues in Indicator Systems 2002 China 05--07 NICE Northern Ireland 2016 Technical Effect Sizes in MLMs Rasch Users’ group SD changes as a result of interventions Gaynor Richardson Michelle Dixon Sarah Craggs David Moseley David Hawker SM Tsui Rob Coe Emma Beatty Kapil Sayal David Galloway Adetayo Kasim

Baseline for PIPS The challenges Children do not read nor write Limited STM Limited time for the assessment Limited time to train assessors Enormous rage of ages and developmental levels Special needs and 1st language

Constraints and solutions Must be enjoyable Must be one-to-one Many short different parts Use sequences with stopping rules Recorded sound Special arrangements for special needs Separate teacher rating for PSD & behaviour

Demo of the Dutch version Story

Use of the PIPS Baseline Assessed > 2 million children since 1994 Translated/adapted into 12 languages Used for formative feedback over 20 years Assesses at the start and end of first year at school Early reading and early maths PSD, behaviour, physical development

Using data systematically Tracking students through their schooling First Years at School; First Three Years First Seven years BLA to GCSE Inattention, hyperactivity and impulsiveness; Prevalence of sub-clinical feature Links to attainment International comparisons

Baseline to GCSE: Questions How well does PIPS predict GCSE? Does an “effective” class impact on later success?

The data 45,000 cases Assessments Background data Start of Reception (age 4) End of reception (age 5) End of KS1 (age 7) End of KS2 (age 11) GCSE (maths and English at age 16) Background data Lots

Age and term of starting school

Prediction of GCSE Correlations: with start of Reception scores

The first year at school Massive gains Reading: Effect Size=2.8 Maths: Effect Size=2.2 Copy of Normal curve and ES2.xls Big difference between classes

Does an “effective” class impact on later success?

Interventions Feedback to schools ‘96 Advice to teachers ‘02 Peer Tutoring ‘06-’07 Physical activity levels ‘14-’15 David Bolden

Challenging policy and practice Testing Opening a can of worms Accountability Can it be Fair? Dysfunctional Effects of League Tables Ofsted Standards over time: KS2, BLA, GCSE, A level Effectiveness studies School effectiveness at an impasse Effects of Student Composition on School Outcomes Andy Wiggins Karen Jones Rob Coe

Standards at the end of KS2 Massive efforts to raise standards in England National Curriculum - 1988 National testing – 1991-95 Ofsted - 1992 More than 600 initiatives for Basic Skills in primary schools National Numeracy Strategy National Literacy Strategy League tables, target setting, homework clubs, etc etc etc

Costs Ofsted NNS NLS National testing £100, 000,000 a year £500,000,000 NLS National testing £40 per pupil per subject per year

KS2 Percent With Level 4+

Independent data Reading and maths in primary schools PIPS Y6 Massey et al Davis & Brember PIPS Y4 MidYIS Y7 QCA/DFES/NFER Y5 Brown et al LEA 1 LEA 2 LEA 3 LEA 5 LEA 6 Surrey Y7

That is, from: Twelve independent studies Two thirds of a million assessments

What really happened

We are no alone

Why did basic skills not improve? Policies without an evidence base Assumption that common sense is enough Inherent resistance The way ideas in education spread The fallacy of transplanting good practice Unintended consequences The levels were already high and teachers were doing a good job

Opportunistic research Birthweight, weight gain in infancy Do men bring out the best in boys and women the best in girls Homework Bruce Carrington

Lee Copping, John Little, Helen Cramman Jens and Nadin Beckmann What now? iPIPS Sex differences Number scale Regression discontinuity and STM Standards over time – international Helen Gray; Andrew Lyth; Catherine McKenna; Susan Stothard; Lee Copping Lee Copping, John Little, Helen Cramman Jens and Nadin Beckmann Cesare Aloisi

The Western Cape: Grade 1

The iPIPS project International project to monitor children’s development on entry to school and progress to end of first year Used in: England Scotland Australia Netherlands New Zealand Russia Brazil South Africa Abu Dhabi China Slovenia Germany Serbia

Ages at the start of year

Massive variation in backgrounds From a questionnaire to parents Lowest 20% no tap water and no electricity Highest 20% internet connect, TV and flushing toilet

Making comparisons We are able to compare reading and maths across the three languages

Progress in Reading Start % End % Comprehension Sentences Words 1.8 16.7 Sentences 5.9 40.3 Words 39.0 79.7 Letters 96.5 99.8 Ground 100 100

Reading: Links to end of year

Behaviour England

That scattergram again

Thank you